RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01144
		INDEX CODE:  131.00, 107.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The effective date of the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) awarded for the period 24 Jul 89 through 23 Jan 91 be changed to 1 February 1991 and that he receive supplemental promotion consideration for all promotion cycles in which the AFCM was not a matter of record.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In a previous decision by the Board, his Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing on 31 May 90 was upgraded from an overall "4" to "5".  He was previously awarded an Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) for the above period.  After his EPR was upgraded, the award approving authority revoked the AFAM and upgraded it to an AFCM.

The AFCM was prepared using AF Form 2224, dated July 1999.  The citation in his supplemental selection folder should be prepared landscape on bond paper in the same format that was used in 1991.  Using the new AFCM format will draw unnecessary attention to his record and identify him as the record receiving supplemental consideration.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 14 Sep 81.  He has been progressively promoted to the grade of master sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 May 97.  He was considered and selected for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant for cycle 02E8.

As a result of a previous AFBCMR case which resulted in the upgrading of his EPR closing on 31 May 90, he received supplemental promotion consideration for cycles 99E8 and 00E8 on 29 Jul 02 and was not selected for promotion (see Exhibit G).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial.  
DPPPWB states that the AFCM is worth 3 points toward promotion and the AFAM is worth 1 point.  If the Board directs supplemental promotion consideration, the decoration would not increase his score sufficiently enough for him to become a selectee for the technical or master sergeant cycles.  His score would increase enough to become a selectee to senior master sergeant for cycle 01E8, but not for cycles 99E8 and 00E8.  

Current Air Force promotion policy dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the closeout date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD), and the date of the DECOR-6, must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question.  Each promotion cycle has an established PECD which is used to determine what Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) or Chief Enlisted Manager (CEM) Code the member will be considered for promotion in, as well as which performance reports and decorations will be used in the promotion consideration.  The PECD for cycle 01E6 was 31 Dec 00.  In addition, a decoration that a member claims was lost, downgraded, etc., must be fully documented and verified that it was placed into official channels prior to the selection date. 

As evidenced by the special order awarding the applicant’s AFCM, this decoration does not meet the criteria for promotion credit for any previous cycles because the date the order was published and the decoration signed is 2 Apr 02—after selections were made for all previous cycles in question.  This policy was initiated to specifically preclude personnel from subsequently (after promotion selections) submitting someone for a decoration with a retroactive decoration effective date (close out) so as to put them over the selection cutoff score.  Exceptions to the above policy are only considered when the airman can support a previous submission with documentation or statements including conclusive evidence that the recommendation was officially placed in military channels within the prescribed time limit and conclusive evidence the recommendation was not acted upon through loss or inadvertence.  A decoration is considered to have been placed in official channels when the decoration recommendation is signed by the initiating official and indorsed by a higher official in the chain of command. 

Supplemental promotion consideration is granted on a case-by-case basis for reasons listed in table 2.5 of AFI 36-2502.  The applicant did not take appropriate corrective or follow-up action before any of the original boards convened and waited 10 years after the date of discovery in 1991.  The DPPPWB evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPR reviewed applicant’s request and recommends that the AFCM, dated 2 Apr 02, be considered effective on 23 Jan 91, as directed and authorized by AFI 36-2803, paragraph 3.4.2 and considered to have been the legitimate and actual decoration awarded to him for the period of 24 Jul 89 through 23 Jan 91.  The AFCM should be considered to have existed since 23 Jan 91 and be used to consider all personnel actions since 23 Jan 91.  However, DPPPR recommends denial of his request to not use the new style AFCM certificate/citation, dated 2 Apr 02, and instead use the old style landscape format citation in his supplemental promotion folder, because there is no provision to substitute any of the documents in that folder.  The DPPPR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that his decoration is not an "after-the-fact" decoration as indicated by DPPPWB.  His AFAM existed when promotion results were released and was upgraded after the AFBCMR decision to upgrade his EPR.   It would be fair and equitable to extend supplemental promotion consideration for the decoration since he has not been given the opportunity to compete fairly for promotion with his contemporaries.  The statement made by his former wing commander which indicated "Had I been presented with a record with all "5’s" in 1991, I would have approved an AFCM at that time.”  This is not an "after-the-fact" statement regarding his decoration upgrade.  His complete submission is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  In a previous Board decision, the applicant's EPR closing on 31 May 90 was upgraded to reflect an overall "5" promotion recommendation.  In support of his request the applicant provided documentation from the awarding authority indicating that if the EPR had been a "5" at the time it was originally rendered, he would have awarded the applicant an AFCM and subsequently upgraded the medal.  We note and agree with the recommendation of the Chief, Recognitions Programs Branch that the AFCM should be treated as though it existed on 23 Jan 91.  In view of this, it is our opinion that the applicant should receive supplemental promotion consideration for all cycles in which the AFCM should have been a matter of record.  Accordingly, we recommend that his records be corrected to the extent indicated below.  We note that the Air Force has already determined that inclusion of the AFCM will not result in changes to his selection status for promotion cycles to the grades of technical sergeant and master sergeant.  Therefore, we do not believe it is necessary to recommend supplemental consideration for these cycles.

4.  Notwithstanding the aforementioned, we do not believe sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice regarding that portion of his request that the AFCM certificate be replaced with the old style landscape format AFCM citation in his selection folder.  While it is conceivable that the use of the new AFCM format may draw attention to his record and identify his record as receiving supplemental consideration, the applicant has failed to establish that the selection board members would fail to fulfill their responsibilities and sworn duty to provide fair and equitable consideration of the applicant's record.  Therefore, we agree with the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rational as the basis for our conclusion that an error or injustice does not exist concerning this issue. 

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 99E8 with the Air Force Commendation Medal, awarded for the period 24 July 1989 through 23 January 1991, included in his selection record.

If selected for promotion to senior master sergeant by supplemental consideration, he be provided any additional supplemental consideration required as a result of that selection.

If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the applicant ineligible for the promotion, such information will be documented and presented to the Board for a final determination on the individual’s qualifications for the promotion.

If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for promotion to any higher grades, immediately after such promotion the records shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grades on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that he is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02-01144 in Executive Session on 9 Sep 02, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Apr 02, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 23 May 02, w/atchs.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 28 Jun 02, w/atchs.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Jul 02.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 23 Jul 02.
     Exhibit G.  Record of Proceedings, AFBCMR Docket #01-00201.

								

AFBCMR 02-01144

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

		The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 99E8 with the Air Force Commendation Medal, awarded for the period 24 July 1989 through 23 January 1991, included in his selection record.

		If selected for promotion to senior master sergeant by supplemental consideration, he be provided any additional supplemental consideration required as a result of that selection.

		If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the applicant ineligible for the promotion, such information will be documented and presented to the Board for a final determination on the individual’s qualifications for the promotion.

		If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for promotion to any higher grades, immediately after such promotion the records shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grades on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that he is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.